I was hoping for a serious discussion. I guess no one here has the guts to tackle this forbidden topic. :(
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
I was hoping for a serious discussion. I guess no one here has the guts to tackle this forbidden topic. :(
if the discussion doesn't go in the direction that you want it to then it's not serious?
ok..
gotcha.
Hey, give me the benefit of doubt! Remember, the standard deviation for whites is higher, which is why there are so many morons like me who can't understand your cryptic posts. :P
words mean things.
what does standard deviation mean?
is the bell curve taller or flatter?
f
Ok. For the normal probability density function, it is the parameter that "means" the amount of variation around the mean. (See the sigma in the formula for a normal PDF here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normal_distribution)
But I don't know what you are getting at? And it's probably going to take me a few days to find time to read the refereed article.
You edited your post to add the diagram and the second question after I responded to it. The most useful answer to your first question is that any normally distributed random variable has a probability of approximately 95% of being within two standard deviations of the mean (if I remember my stat class correctly).
It is customary in science to reject the "null hypothesis" if the results of the measurements are less than 5% likely if the null hypothesis is true.
You edited your post to add the diagram and the second question after I responded to it
and your point? Is that supposed to be a bad thing?
Sometimes I don't think of everything I want to say right off...so I add to it.
Just keeping the record tidy. I will fix typos, but I will put any significant addition in a separate reply. This has several benefits including notifying my correspondent that I have added more in response.
um yeah...
does that mean you're acting as a go-between?
that I'm not really talking to you but that you are an intermediary?
Fun Fact:
nuther fun fact
100 IQ IS the mean.
fifty percent of the population has an IQ lover than 100...fifty percent higher.
Apparently the "2/3 of the population" range depends upon both race and gender.
"An IQ gap of at least 1.1 SDs for American Blacks (average 24% White admixture)
and Whites has been present for the entire 100+ year history of IQ tests. The gap
between African Blacks and Whites is 2.0 SDs." (Radical Capitalism article)
That means that the mean IQ for African Blacks is within the lower 2.5% tail of the distribution for Whites.
I do intend to study the refereed article carefully. But if the Radical Capitalist article is summarizing it honestly, it means that the White Supremacists are actually scientifically correct. The possibility, and its implications, stun me.